04-1020Council File # ��
Green Sheet # 3�a ��
RESOLUTION
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented
Referred To
Committee Date
� to
i WHEREAS, the Legislative Hearing Officer recommends that the license application (ID #20040002237) for Gas
2 Station, Retail Food Grocery, Cigazette/Tobacco License for S& E Minneapolis, Inc. d/b/a One Stop Grocery, 778
3 Smith Avenue South be approved with the following conditions:
4 1. All deliveries shali take place between 7:OOam and 10:00pm only.
5 2. Garbage pick-up shall take place between 7:OOam and 10:00pm only.
6 3. Provide physical screening for the dumpster according to the approved site plan on file with LIEP by
7 November 30, 2004.
8 4. Install a physical barrier between the shed and the main building and the shed and the southerly fence, as
9 shown on the approved site plan on file with LIEP by November 30, 2004.
10 5. Install a physical barrier (i.e. fence, pylons, bumpers) along the alley as shown on the approved site plan on
11 file with LIEP by November 30, 2004.
12 THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby approves this license
13 application with the conditions listed.
Requested by Department of.
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
�
Appr
�
�
Form Approved by City Attorney
�
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
Adopted by Council: Date �Gb�� ��, °� O�T
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
DepartmeMloffice/wuncil:
co -�ou��;�
Cordact Person 8 Phone:
Marcia Moermond
6-8560
Be on Council Agenda by (Date):
-- - ---------- C7-1.-t
Date initiated:
,�o�T-04 Green Sheet NO: 3023862
y
Assign
Number
For
Routing
Order
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Lowtions for Signature)
Action Requested:
Approving the license application with condirions, per the Legisla6ve Hearing Officer, for Gas Station, Retail Food Grocery,
Cigarette/Tobacco License for S& E Minneapolis Inc. d/b/a One Stop Grocery, 778 Smiffi Avenue South.
dations: Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CB Committee
Civil Service Commission
Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Foliowing
1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department?
Yes No
2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this personlfirm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current cfty employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
AdvantapeslfApproved:
DisadvantapeslfApproved:
Disadvantages If Not Approved:
7otat Amount of
Transaction:
Fundinq Source:
,
Deoartment SentToPerson Initial/Date
0 Council (
i ouncil � Deoartment Director
2 itv Clerk � CiN Clerk �
3
4
5
CosNRevenue Budgeted:
Activity Num6er:
Financiai Information:
(Explain)
b�-I - l oa�
MINIJTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING `� ��
S& E Minnapolis d/b/a One Stop Grocery - 778 Smith Avenue
Monday, October 4, 2004
Room 330 City Ha1UCourthouse
Mazcia Moerxnond, Legislative Hearing Officer
The hearing was called to order at 2:00 p.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Hawkins, License, Inspection, and Environmental Protection (LIEP)
Bill Milota, attorney representing the owner, Osman Musani, appeazed and stated the property was
being leased to Steven Wazwaz, the applicant, and they were waiting for him to arrive.
Ms. Moermond recessed the meeting at 2:15 and reconvened at 2:20.
Ms. Moermond explained fhis was a Iegislative in which she would make a recommendation to the
City Council. The Council could choose to: 1) grant the license without conditions; 2) grant the license
with conditions; or 3) recommend that the application go to an administrative law judge (ALJ). The
Council would have the fmal determination on the outcome of the license.
Jeff Hawkins, LIEP, explained the license was for a gas station, retail food grocery and a cigarette
tobacco license. LIEP reviewed and approved the license. All zoning violations had been corrected.
The businesses did not have a current license and therefore was not in operation. Fire wouid inspect
the premises if the license moved forward. He pointed out that there were no pending adverse actions
against the applicant. He recommended the license be granted.
Steven Wazwaz, applicant appeared and stated it was his intention to operate a gas station and
convenience store at this location. He currently operated a gas statian, Super USA, on Hamline and
Thomas. He had reviewed the complaints from the neighbars and did not understand their issues since
it had a previous owner. The intended hours of operation would be from 8 am. to 9 p.m., however, he
would have to see what times would work best. He had invested approximately $20,000 in the
property. Since he didn't have a license to operate, he was still having to pay for electricity, alarm
system and gazbage pick up.
Mr. Milota stated the property had been fixed up and the zoning violations had been abated. There had
been an unlicensed vehicle on the property which someone had been sleeping in, however, with the
business being closed, no one was monitoring the property. This was the same issue with the graffiti
on the building. He believed the occupancy of the building would make it more advantageous to the
neighborhood. His client had owned the property for approximately two years.
Candice Alewine, 781 Manomin Avenue, appeazed and presented photos of the property. The gas
station had been there for 40 years. The person who had been living in the vehicle claimed to be the
manager. This was when the obscene graffiti appeared on the back of the building and on the vehicle.
The vehicle had expired tabs and had been on the property for four months. She had complained to the
city about the vehicle and was told there was nothing they would do about it. The back wall was being
used as a urinal which she could see from her kitchen window. It was her opinion that the
a
O�— I�Zc�
October 4, 2004 Legislative Hearing—S & E Minneapolis Page 2
neighborhood did not need this gas station since there were two other gas starions in close proximity.
There had also been numerous robberies at the property. She suggested they could enclose the trash to
prevent illegal dumping and install a fence.
Mark Klika, 774 Smith Avenue, appeazed and presented photos of the properry. He lived across the
street from the properry and there had been constant problems as the ownership changed so frequently.
He requested the new owner not remove the snow from their lot onto his property. There was a shed at
the reaz of the property ttiax was constantly being used as a urinal. There was also a lot of people who
dumped trash at the reaz of the property because he believed this azea was not visible and was
accessible. He suggested putting up a fence between the properry and the shed to keep people from
going back there.
Emma Candelier, 766 Manomin Avenue, appeared and stated they had chosen to live in the
neighborhood because of its cl�racter, it was safe and property values had risen. During the two years
they had lived there, three different owners had owned the properiy. It was her opinion that the exterior
of the building was an eyesore. She indicated there had been improvements over the past week to the
exterior of the building, however, was uncertain as to the condition of the interior. The biggest concern
was the number of business owners who failed. She would prefer the license not be granted, however,
if the license were granted, she requested gas deliveries be made during daylight hoars. She also
believed the biacktop should be replaced and the owner install a fence in the rear of the property.
Pascal Candelier, 766 Manomin Avenue, appeared and stated there were two gas stations within six
blocks from this station. There appeared to be no problems at these other two stations in the two years
they had lived in the neighborhood.
Bethany Ames, 799 Manomin Avenue, appeazed and stated her property shazed the alley with the gas
station. As far as the suggestion of fencing, there was approximately a 20 to 30 foot area of
ingress/egress from the lot to the alley that is open. Cars drive through this space at high speeds down
the alley. She suggested this area be fenced to prevent cazs from entering the alley from the lot. She
also suggested the ground water be tested to ensure there was no seepage from the tanks. There were
two other gas stations in close proximity which she believed adequately served the needs of the
neighborhood. She believed the gas station was an eyesore to the community.
Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Hawkins to address the ground water testing and what considerations
Licensing has on this.
Mr. Hawkins stated the Fire Department issues the certificate of occupancy and if they believed there
was seepage from the tanks, they would contact the EPA. Generally, the tanks would need to be
removed to test the ground water. As for the other concerns of the neighbors, the Super America down
the street abutted a residential neighborhood and there was a condition on the license that no gas
deliveries be allowed between midnight and 6 a.m.
Mr. Milota stated a phase one environmental study had been done when the property had been acquired
and it came back clean. Approximately six months ago, a tank integrity test had been done which
indicated there was no leakage from the tanks. This was normal procedure when a gas station business
is being purchased by another buyer. They would be willing to put up a fence in the back by the alley
and would be willing to enclose the dumpster area. They could also perhaps put up lighting in the
c��-toz�
October 4, 2004 Legislative Hearing—S & E Minneapolis Page 3
back, however, it likely would not stop the behavior of people dumping. The best remedy would be to
have the property operating rather than being vacant.
Ms. Moermond stated that as the Legislative Hearing Officer, she heard matters concerning gazbage
and graffiti complaints. The city had the right to issue orders to any owner, residential or commercial,
to abate the problem or the city would do it and charge it to the owner. In reviewing the photos of the
property, the owner cleazly had not been keeping up the property which was lus responsibility whether
the properiy was leased and operating or not.
There was discussion amongst the parties and staff conceming access and barriers from the parking lot
to the rear of the atley as well as screening for the dumpster.
Ms. Moermond stated the neighbors were good people and had dealt with a lot of problems from
previous owners. She suggested the owner be willing to work with the neighbors on their concerns to
make it a viable business in the neighborhood. She also suggested the owner talk to the West Side
Citizen Organization, NeDA or REDA for possible assistance and perhaps some technical advice to
make improvements to the property.
Mr. Musani stated he was willing to work with the neighbors and would like to know what the
neighbors would like to see as far as improvements to the property.
Ms. Moermond suggested Mr. Musani talk to the Super America Store on Smith to see what they had
done to their property. She also suggested Mr. Musani could talk with the neighbors after the meefing
to find out their specific concerns and what they would suggest to improve the property. She suggested
if the owner used lighting for security at the reaz of the property, that it be screened at the base to block
the lighting from going into the neighbor's windows all night. She also suggested Mr. Musani talk to
the Police Department on suggestions for lighting and to prevent the rear of the building to continue to
be used for adverse activity.
Mr. Hawkins suggested the owner could also talk to WSCO, NeDA or REDA or the police to discuss
options on a site plan for use on the lighting. He also believed blocking off access to the dumpster
should help prevent a lot of the problems.
Ms. Moermond recommended the owner provide an Affidavit agreeing to the following conditions on
the license since the applicant would not be required to make the recommended improvements. The
recommendations were as follows: All deliveries shall take place between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
only. Gazbage pick-up shall take place between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 pm. only. Provide physical
screening for the dutnpster. Install a physical barrier between the shed and the main building and the
shed and the southerly fence. Install a physical barrier, such as a fence, pylons, or bumpers, along the
alley. A site plan would need to be provided far the screening of the dumpster, the physical barrier
between the shed and the fence and the physical barrier along the alley to LIEP for approval priar to
November 30, 2004. She suggested the license be reviewed in six months for compliance.
The hearing was adjourned at 3:35 p.m.
vms